Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-19 Thread Dave Chinner
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:07:46AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:59 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > > On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > > > > [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-19 Thread Dave Chinner
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:07:46AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:59 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too long for

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-12 Thread Paweł Sikora
On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 13:03:56 Dave Jones wrote: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 06:59:07PM +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > > On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > > > > [16855.582522] list passed to

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-12 Thread Joe Perches
On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:59 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > > > [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency > > > > > > could someone put some light on the

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-12 Thread Dave Jones
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 06:59:07PM +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > > > [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency > > > > > > could someone put some

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-12 Thread Paweł Sikora
On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > > [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency > > > > could someone put some light on the last line? > > Did you look at the list_sort function in

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-12 Thread Paweł Sikora
On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency could someone put some light on the last line? Did you look at the list_sort function in lib/list_sort.c?

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-12 Thread Dave Jones
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 06:59:07PM +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency could someone put some light on the

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-12 Thread Joe Perches
On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:59 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency could someone put some light on the last line?

Re: [3.13.2] list passed to list_sort() too long for efficiency.

2014-02-12 Thread Paweł Sikora
On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 13:03:56 Dave Jones wrote: On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 06:59:07PM +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: On Wednesday 12 of February 2014 09:46:26 Joe Perches wrote: On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 18:16 +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: [16855.582522] list passed to list_sort() too